Michael Emrys Posted September 16, 2013 Share Posted September 16, 2013 I was testing the file storage linky thingy... I was going to take them down but then thought.. ah hell, who's going to notice them? Ha ha! Great hilarity at this end. We always notice, Bil. Especially mistakes and accidents. :D Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLSTK Posted September 16, 2013 Share Posted September 16, 2013 No doubt the doctor gave the same reply when he brought Michael into this world. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLSTK Posted September 16, 2013 Share Posted September 16, 2013 Carry on Bil. We love what you're doing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted September 29, 2013 Author Share Posted September 29, 2013 Blog update: I just added the next explanation of basic tactics that you will need for the two introductory scenarios. Fire & Movement Please let me know what you think, and especially if this is helpful in any way. Enjoy! Bil 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted September 29, 2013 Author Share Posted September 29, 2013 Blog Update: I just added the final of the basic tactics instructions necessary to successfully play the first two scenarios. Reconnaissance by Fire Enjoy! Bil 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GerryCMBB Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 Hello Bil: Sorry for being dense but this seems like some of the other techniques where you have a maneuver element and a support element? Gerry Blog update: I just added the next explanation of basic tactics that you will need for the two introductory scenarios...... Bil 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted September 29, 2013 Author Share Posted September 29, 2013 Gerry, if you examine the two techniques you should see some obvious differences: -- Squad Attack Drill - one element in support while the second takes up the assault element role and maneuvers through covered terrain (if possible) to assault the enemy position while the support element suppresses the enemy unit -- Fire & Movement - the two elements take turns either providing support or advancing as they bound forward until they can assault the enemy position So though both use a Support and a Maneuver element, how they advance and assault the enemy position is unique to each 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vark Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 Can I second the, watch, wait, observe, act cycle. Had some Marine recon move into a building and open up as soon as they saw Syrian Paratroopers in the building opposite. The first time they took three casualties and suppressed the force, but had to rely on more and more assets being employed to help them, End result, a Ko'd LAV and a team out of action and the enemy still lurking, though badly shot up. Next time, I put the recon on hide and short target arcs, they snuck in and watched for 3-4 minutes, locating a sniper, squad of paratroopers and RPG team. As the intel filtered down, I moved assets to prepare for an assault. Once everything was ready, I launched the assault. End result: one lone Syrian survivor retreating, sniper and RPG team dead and best of all, the Syrians had themselves to commit reserves to bolster their defences. Those defences were pinned and a precious BMP-3 lost, with the Marines suffering one red and three yellow casualties. So recon, recon, recon, then plan and only then, strike. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GerryCMBB Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 Thanks Bil. I assume there are times when to use the Squad Attack versus the Fire and Maneuver drill? Would one prefer the former when only one element has weapons like MGs that are good for support/suppression? Gerry 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted September 29, 2013 Author Share Posted September 29, 2013 Blog Update I have uploaded the briefing for the Infantry Tactical Problem 001 - Squad Attack scenario. Enjoy! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted September 29, 2013 Author Share Posted September 29, 2013 Thanks Bil. I assume there are times when to use the Squad Attack versus the Fire and Maneuver drill? Would one prefer the former when only one element has weapons like MGs that are good for support/suppression? Gerry Gerry, yes its totally situation dependent.. only practice and experimentation with them will give you the experience you need to know which to use. When you can download and play the little scenarios I have uploaded try them a couple times using each battle drill, then you should have some idea on how these work and when you should and should not apply them. Bil 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted September 29, 2013 Author Share Posted September 29, 2013 Blog Update I have uploaded the briefing for the Armored Tactical Problem 001 - Tank Section Attack scenario. Enjoy! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted September 29, 2013 Author Share Posted September 29, 2013 Can I second the, watch, wait, observe, act cycle. Had some Marine recon move into a building and open up as soon as they saw Syrian Paratroopers in the building opposite. The first time they took three casualties and suppressed the force, but had to rely on more and more assets being employed to help them, End result, a Ko'd LAV and a team out of action and the enemy still lurking, though badly shot up. Next time, I put the recon on hide and short target arcs, they snuck in and watched for 3-4 minutes, locating a sniper, squad of paratroopers and RPG team. As the intel filtered down, I moved assets to prepare for an assault. Once everything was ready, I launched the assault. End result: one lone Syrian survivor retreating, sniper and RPG team dead and best of all, the Syrians had themselves to commit reserves to bolster their defences. Those defences were pinned and a precious BMP-3 lost, with the Marines suffering one red and three yellow casualties. So recon, recon, recon, then plan and only then, strike. Vark, very good anecdote and advice for all to heed. Cheers, Bil 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ridethe415 Posted September 30, 2013 Share Posted September 30, 2013 I downloaded both files, moved them to Scenario folder and neither appear when I look for them. Running 2.01. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GerryCMBB Posted September 30, 2013 Share Posted September 30, 2013 "CMBN 2.10 or MG module Required" from Bil's site. Gerry 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hister Posted September 30, 2013 Share Posted September 30, 2013 This means you'll have to wait for either MG module or the patch sometime later down the road. Made the same mistake some time ago. Bil, these scenarios should be implemented in the base game by developers. They are sorely missing for all us non military champs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted September 30, 2013 Share Posted September 30, 2013 When you can download and play the little scenarios Bill, I would recommend creating those downloadable scenarios with a version of the game that most people have or better yet an earlier one. I realize that newer versions have relevant bug fixes (such as the MG improvements in 2.01 or the coming tank visibility changes in 2.1) but the problem is having games that are not playable by your audience is a limiting factor. I would argue that you should build your games in 1.11 for example then they would be playable by anyone who wants to at no additional cost to them. A scenario created with 1.11 will be totally playable by those of us with 2.01 or when 2.1 comes out as well. What you have done looks really interesting and I have a friend I am trying to get into this game who is having troubles with these very things. He would benefit greatly *now* and of course he only has 2.01. Even if MG comes out today that still will not help him since it will be one or even two months more before the 2.1 patch is released. As you know having more then one version installed at the same time is very straight forward, please consider these issues moving forward. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLSTK Posted September 30, 2013 Share Posted September 30, 2013 I would sooo vote for this man Leslie for Prime Minister...or for President, for that matter. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
para Posted September 30, 2013 Share Posted September 30, 2013 Any chance of these in PDF please? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLSTK Posted September 30, 2013 Share Posted September 30, 2013 Bill, I would recommend creating those downloadable scenarios with a version of the game that most people have or better yet an earlier one. I realize that newer versions have relevant bug fixes (such as the MG improvements in 2.01 or the coming tank visibility changes in 2.1) but the problem is having games that are not playable by your audience is a limiting factor. I would argue that you should build your games in 1.11 for example then they would be playable by anyone who wants to at no additional cost to them. A scenario created with 1.11 will be totally playable by those of us with 2.01 or when 2.1 comes out as well. What you have done looks really interesting and I have a friend I am trying to get into this game who is having troubles with these very things. He would benefit greatly *now* and of course he only has 2.01. Even if MG comes out today that still will not help him since it will be one or even two months more before the 2.1 patch is released. As you know having more then one version installed at the same time is very straight forward, please consider these issues moving forward. +1 to that, Bil. I vote for change. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted September 30, 2013 Share Posted September 30, 2013 I would sooo vote for this man Leslie for Prime Minister...or for President, for that matter. Yikes what are you trying to do kill me If I had that job I would never have any time to play CM. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLSTK Posted September 30, 2013 Share Posted September 30, 2013 I've already come up with a campaign slogan: "Uncle Steve (Harper) Wants You!" PS - I wouldn't worry about a lack of CM playing time. You could always just "go pro-rogue". 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted September 30, 2013 Share Posted September 30, 2013 I've already come up with a campaign slogan: "Uncle Steve (Harper) Wants You!" PS - I wouldn't worry about a lack of CM playing time. You could always just "go pro-rogue". Groan. Do you think that is the real reason he prorogued parliament - so he could play the recently released GTA5? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted September 30, 2013 Author Share Posted September 30, 2013 I would argue that you should build your games in 1.11 for example then they would be playable by anyone who wants to at no additional cost to them. A scenario created with 1.11 will be totally playable by those of us with 2.01 or when 2.1 comes out as well. Well I don't even have version 1 of any iteration installed anymore and I don't think I would want to do that, I have so many versions already, multiple BETA versions, all of the release versions, etc.. Really 2.01 is a must, and I don't think there will be a charge for the 2.10 upgrade (Steve correct me if I'm wrong) so that shouldn't be a problem other than having to patiently wait for it to come out. MG is not needed for these, only the 2.10 patch. I do promise that in the future I will build any new scenarios from 2.10 and not whatever the latest BETA is using... that should simplify matters in the future. So let's call 2.10 the baseline and build on that for future additions to this series. Fair enough? Bil 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted September 30, 2013 Share Posted September 30, 2013 I don't think there will be a charge for the 2.10 upgrade (Steve correct me if I'm wrong) so that shouldn't be a problem other than having to patiently wait for it to come out. MG is not needed for these, only the 2.10 patch. I am sure there will be no charge for the 2.1 patch - for those who have 2.0. One target market for your excellent blog will be those who bought the game when it first came out and gave up because they could not quite get a handle on tactics and how to handle their troops. I know this because the friend I mentioned is such a person. Now he is trying again and he put more money in to get to 2.0 but I suspect not all of those people will do that. Nothing about your tutorials really needs 2.1. I realize they will work better with 2.1 but the lessons learned playing in 1.11 or 2.01 would be just as valid while playing those games as they would playing 2.1. Bil, what you have created will be very useful. I am looking forward to trying them out to see if I really do get it or only think I do:-). Only you can decide how you will spend your time and how you will make your project. I was just thinking about a target group that is not being served. Heck none of us can make use of your scenarios at the moment and it could be a few more weeks before anyone can. Then there are those not buying the MG module who will have to wait another month or more. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.